Apparently x264 has been obsoleted by x265 aka HVEC, a newer

>>59344729

aaaand x265 will be obsolete soon because AV1 is near anon.

>>59344945
>AV1
neat

The tool is called x265

>>59344945
>http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/Editorial/What-Is-.../What-is-AV1-111497.aspx
>The Alliance is targeting an improvement of 50 percent over VP9/HEVC with reasonable increases in encoding and playback complexity.
>Once available, YouTube expects to transition to AV1 as quickly as possible, particularly for video configurations such as UHD, HDR, and high frame rate videos where the codec is expected to deliver significant bandwidth savings over VP9.

>>59345148
>x264 made a 4.3 gig file
>x265 is supposed to be twice as efficient for lower res (1080p) formats
>so could be 2.2 gigsh, ish
>AV1 is targeting a 50% improvement over HVEC
>so 3x better than x264
>my 4.3 x264 file today could be a 1.2 ish gig file tomorrow
i like it when technology advances

>>59345148
Then I will be able to download 2160p movies in 2-3gb with AV1? Sweet.

>>59345167
>AV1 is targeting a 50% improvement over HVEC
nnnnngh yes

File: slowpoke_pokemon.jpg (27KB, 600x655px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 600x655px

>>59344729
HEVC has been out since 2013 bro

>>59344945
I can't wait for everything to be AV1 / Opus. Truly a victory for open standards.

File: BBC-TOS7.jpg (122KB, 1021x706px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 1021x706px

xmediarecode

>>59345148
Holy shit

>>59344729
AV1 > HEVC

Unencumbered codec > your shit

>>59344729
x264 and x265 are the name of the tools used for conversion (i.e. the codecs) that are included in ffmpeg, not the names of the video fornats themselves.
Those are H-264 and, yes, HEVC.

>>59345906
lol no

>>59346242
x264 and x265 are available on their own, but it's better to use them with ffmpeg

great even more shit my old computer can't deal with

>>59347764
>wahh technology should remain static because i'm a broke faggot

>>59347812
>buy more hardware goyyyyyyyyyyyy
XDD

>>59344729
Okay so two things :

>H.265 Video Codec (HVEC for short) is a video codec as you can see by it's name.

>x265 is a HVEC encoder

so you're asking to convert a H.264 encoder to a H.265 encoder, which make no sense.

x265 is already an encoder, so use it in command line to convert a video encoded in H.264 (AVC).

If you want an UI I proprose this one : http://www.selur.de/

Recently been upgrading all my movie collection the last few months to 265/HEVC. Quality is better, sizes smaller.

Hard to find every release in this format but, I've got old movie files still in .avi 700mb just because even 264 has never been available over the years for those movies. But from 1,300 movies only about 150 now are .avis... Massive change, will slowly upgrade to AV1 in a few more years when that change happens.

>>59344945
You've been saying this for like a year now

>>59348037
>lossy codec
>better quality
that's not how it works

>>59348085
To my eyes the x265 rips look better than x264 and that all I honestly care about.

>>59344945
Which CPU/GPU can do AV1? (legit question)

ty

>>59348123

none

>>59348105
In terms of quality x265 is objectively worst

>>59348123
None. Bitstream specification is not even finished yet, but should be done in current quarter. Google announced it will introduce AV1 to YT up to six month later.

>>59344945
What is av1?

>>59348294
a shitty unreleased meme

File: codec-generations.png (29KB, 590x375px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 590x375px

>>59348294
A new video codec developed by alliance of pretty much all significant companies in media industry in free and open source way.

>>59348430
Well that sounds positive

>>59344729
FFMPEG mein bruder

Use NVENC if you have an Nvidia card that's GTX 960 or 10-series and you can encode with GPGPU

>>59344729
And 4chan still doesn't support it

>>59348436
It's got Google, Microsoft, Mozilla, Adobe, Netflix, Amazon, Cisco, AMD, Nvidia, Intel, ARM, Broadcom and Amlogic onboard

>>59344729
I have, using cpu gives better results.
Ive experimented with converting videos to x265.
gpu acceleration always produced a very shitty image.

When using cpu only I could get results of a smaller file size and no noticeable difference in image quality.

with gpu, I could get smaller size and shittier picture, somewhat smaller size and shitty picture to only the trained eye, and the only outcome with no noticeable loss to picture was the lossless setting which turned a 4gb x264 file into a 35gb x265 file.


If anyone knows how to make this shit work with good results please let me know.

>>59348519
That's pretty much how it works.

x265 (CPU based encoder) isn't really that good so it mostly looks like H.264 if not slightly worse except for low bitrate videos where HEVC offers superior compression/less blocking.

GPU based encoders are always bad, they should only be your last-resort if you need to do video encoding in a short amount of time (or realtime).

When video encoding is going to hit upper limit?

>>59344945
but...
The 4K blu-rays already adopted HEVC. DTH Satellite and cable providers too. Contribution feeds will also be broadcast in HEVC.
The industry (today) already chose HEVC.

>>59348726
Surely not the internet part of industry. No internet VOD provider uses HEVC because royalties are so high it's simply unprofitable. That's why AV1 is being developed in the first place and it will dominate the internet without doubt. Probably it will be introduced to other media later.

File: nvenc.png (38KB, 1212x555px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 1212x555px

>>59348478
>GTX 960
Other 2nd gen Maxwell chips can also hw encode HEVC, but they can't hardware decode.

>>59348833
>No internet VOD provider uses HEVC because royalties are so high it's simply unprofitable.

Netflix does.

>>59344945

>coming soon™

>>59348918
I didn't know that, thanks

Don't listen to all these retarded AV1 shills. AV1 is still like 4 years away from being relevant.

Anyway staxrip or megui is what you're looking for.

https://github.com/stax76/staxrip/releases
https://sourceforge.net/projects/megui/

Basically megui has more complex features than staxrip but you may not need them.

I recommend 22CRF with the fast preset for most video if you want good quality yet relatively small file size, lower CRF will give you better quality at the expense of higher file sizes. Use CRF 0 with the ultra fast preset if you just want to quickly make a lossless video transcode.

>>59348592
then why are they memed so much? is it simply about muh wait times for most people?
Why does disney spend hundreds of thousands on video cards for this shit if it just ruines the video?

>>59349102
>Don't listen to all these retarded AV1 shills. AV1 is still like 4 years away from being relevant.
wow what an eye opening statement

>>59344729
it will take you longer to transcode from H.264 to H.265 than to just upload the 4.3gb file

>>59344729
H265 is too new, it needs specific hardware decoding just to work without 100% CPU load

>>59348037
recompressing compressed data makes it look worse

>>59349163
>then why are they memed so much? is it simply about muh wait times for most people?
Because they're useful for things like recording gaymen video which is perfectly okay if it can do something like ultra fast CRF 0 if your video editting software can handle it else ultra fast CRF 10.

>Why does disney spend hundreds of thousands on video cards for this shit if it just ruines the video?
You're confusing video editing and 3D rendering with video encoding m80.

>>59348509
So they're gonna stuff it with DRM capabilities?

>>59349271
Codec itself doesn't have DRM like HEVC, h264 or VP9. DRM is a different layer like HTML5 EME.

>>59345148
50% over vp9 is different from 50% of HEVC.

>>59349359
That's good I guess, but I'm still weary that all those companies can get together and produce something good

>>59349414
It's mainly Google and Xiph guys that are doing the coding, combining parts of VP10 and Daala

>>59344729
Man, I got memed by those x265.
They're all full of blocky pixels and shit.

>>59349385
Depends on source material. With flat colors and relatively big contrast VP9 can perform even better than HEVC. But you're right that HEVC is better in most cases.

>>59349489
Have you been using a CRF and the latest x265 encoder like you're supposed to?

https://builds.x265.eu

>>59349543
No, but I tried it on MPC-HC and mpv, it's the same. Opens faster in mpv though.

>>59349489
Last time I checked x264 still produced better picture quality than x265 at the same bitrate except for bitraped encodes.

HVEC videos look the same as x264 but have much higher hardware requirements.

What's the flac of video codecs? How do I get the most compact lossless video?

>>59349582
>How do I get the most compact lossless video
you don't

>>59349606
Why? There's a difference between a BMP and a PNG despite both being lossless. Is there no equivalent for video codecs?

>>59349582
FFV1

>>59349627
Yes
its impractical unless you are editing

>>59349582
>How do I get the most compact lossless video?
PNG.

Are Netflix streams in x265?

The shows they let you download are only around 200mb / episode

>>59349742
Only their 4k streams are HEVC

>>59349582
MLC lossless codec

>>59349582
You don't

>>59350209
HEVC using CRF 0 at the slow preset doesn't agree with you

Though I mostly agree, blu-ray muxes are already overkill.